45 Works

General on-topic discussion.

Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster

User avatar
TJ
Darley line
Posts: 6236
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:54 am
Location: FL, NY

Postby TJ » Wed May 29, 2013 4:53 am

kimberley mine wrote:
TJ wrote:
Eblouissante 45 works prior to her first start came over a 17 month period of her training. She was training around what Shirreffs' reported were weight loss issues, setbacks and growing spurts.


I'm with Sysonby here....520 days of training at $70/day means her owner spent somewhere in the ballpark of $38,500 in training bills before the filly raced even once. You can give a horse time to grow and develop and get over foot issues and get weight on in a paddock for far less than half of that.

it is a family Shirreffs knows and has done well with while developing those he had into graded stakes winners. He is the only trainer, so far...who was able to do that with the foals of Vertigineux. TJ


Not so. Balance was trained by David Hofmans and he did a pretty good job getting multiple graded stakes wins out of her.

Hi Kimberley,
Sorry, my bad with Balance, I thought she was trained by Shirreffs. I should have realized after looking at her form that it wasn't Shirreffs style of training. Balance came to hand much faster and started 4 times as a 2YO running once each month. She starting her 3YO season about 6 weeks later and continued racing once each month till her main objective, the Kentucky Oaks where she broke down and was forced to take more than 7 months off due to an ankle injury. Hofmans did a great job bringing her back to top class racing as a 4YO.
I would be surprised if the training rate at Shirreffs barn is only $70 bucks a day. I would be just as surprised if it was simply growing spurts and backing off her feed that took all that time....but the bottom line is Z and E both got to the races, both were big horses that needed a lot more time then the average horse in order to get to the races safely....Zenyatta was 17.2 hands and E is near the same.....so size does matter. When you think about it....the job Shirreffs has done with these two giants is quit amazing. TJ

User avatar
dublino
Grade I Winner
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:54 am

Postby dublino » Wed May 29, 2013 5:00 am

kimberley mine wrote:I'm with Sysonby here....520 days of training at $70/day means her owner spent somewhere in the ballpark of $38,500 in training bills before the filly raced even once.


$38,500 for a homebread stud fee of $150,000 and raising the horse max of $50,000 including breaking/transport and entry fees.

For a return of $500,000 to $1,000,000 minus above costs about $250,000.

So a $250,000 to $750,000 profit any owner would like the above return when the industry standard is -71% ($29 dollars recouped for every $100 spent)
Edited by Moderator

User avatar
Sysonby
Breeder's Cup Contender
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: California

Postby Sysonby » Wed May 29, 2013 5:32 am

$70 a day is Northern California rates. Shirreffs is closer to $100 a day.

User avatar
TJ
Darley line
Posts: 6236
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:54 am
Location: FL, NY

Postby TJ » Wed May 29, 2013 5:35 am

Sysonby wrote:$70 a day is Northern California rates. Shirreffs is closer to $100 a day.

Hi Sy,
Thanks, I thought $70 was pretty cheap....expect he's getting more then that at Belmont Park. TJ

User avatar
Sysonby
Breeder's Cup Contender
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: California

Postby Sysonby » Wed May 29, 2013 5:40 am

dublino wrote:
kimberley mine wrote:I'm with Sysonby here....520 days of training at $70/day means her owner spent somewhere in the ballpark of $38,500 in training bills before the filly raced even once.


$38,500 for a homebread stud fee of $150,000 and raising the horse max of $50,000 including breaking/transport and entry fees.

For a return of $500,000 to $1,000,000 minus above costs about $250,000.

So a $250,000 to $750,000 profit any owner would like the above return when the industry standard is -71% ($29 dollars recouped for every $100 spent)


Are you saying a more efficient trainer couldn't have had the same results or better? Do you really think the Jones Boys or Whittingham or Frankel spent a year and a half getting one ready?

The point of this isn't to dump all over Shirreffs but to illustrate the new normal at the top and how it is coloring our perception of the breed. This horse has had 24 miles of fast works essentially without a significant break. She is not an example of how fragile the Thoroughbred has become because she has had only 2 starts.

User avatar
dublino
Grade I Winner
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:54 am

Postby dublino » Wed May 29, 2013 5:47 am

All I am saying that the trainer is doing a good job, she is 2 for 2.

Maybe the owners want her unbeaten like Zenyatta went for so long.

Who knows the instructions given to the trainer.

She has been placed very well so far 2 for 2.

If you want to talk fragility of the breed and training methods Louis has a thread going on you might be interested in. :lol:
Edited by Moderator

User avatar
Sysonby
Breeder's Cup Contender
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: California

Postby Sysonby » Wed May 29, 2013 5:53 am

TJ wrote:
Sysonby wrote:
TJ wrote:
Lisann wrote:Didn't Zenyatta also have a high number of works before starting?

Hi Lisann,
Yes Z and her 1/2 sister both made their racing debut in November of their 3YO season, which would suggest a long string of workouts prior to their debut. Both for similar reasons, size and extreme caution and patience used by Shirreffs when bringing horses of such size and bloodlines to the races. TJ


A year and a half of works at track dayrate without a race isn't patient and cautious, it's insane.

What do you tell an owner after the first thirty works and the horse isn't ready yet?

Seriously I understand that horses are individuals but generally if a trainer can't get a horse ready in 3 -4 months of steady works either that horse needs to be turned out or that trainer needs to turn in his license.

Hi Sy,
I guess it's hard to understand and quite unusual....especially when money is the the key ingredient concerning most outfits and owners. Yet the fact remains....both Z and E were large horses and every time they picked it up he had to back off and start over because he didn't like what he saw. When you have a good reputation and get the job done, you don't have to tell the owners anything but the truth. TJ


There is another component to this and that is the track. California is an island racing wise suffering from short fields . Part of the deal is that the track gives free board and use of their facilities and you run horses. If a horse isn't going run for 18 months he or she really shouldn't be at a racetrack but at a training facility or at a farm.

Yet another reason this didn't happen in the old days- racing secretaries wouldn't have allowed it.

User avatar
TJ
Darley line
Posts: 6236
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:54 am
Location: FL, NY

Postby TJ » Wed May 29, 2013 7:46 am

Sysonby wrote:
TJ wrote:
Sysonby wrote:
TJ wrote:
Lisann wrote:Didn't Zenyatta also have a high number of works before starting?

Hi Lisann,
Yes Z and her 1/2 sister both made their racing debut in November of their 3YO season, which would suggest a long string of workouts prior to their debut. Both for similar reasons, size and extreme caution and patience used by Shirreffs when bringing horses of such size and bloodlines to the races. TJ


A year and a half of works at track dayrate without a race isn't patient and cautious, it's insane.

What do you tell an owner after the first thirty works and the horse isn't ready yet?

Seriously I understand that horses are individuals but generally if a trainer can't get a horse ready in 3 -4 months of steady works either that horse needs to be turned out or that trainer needs to turn in his license.

Hi Sy,
I guess it's hard to understand and quite unusual....especially when money is the the key ingredient concerning most outfits and owners. Yet the fact remains....both Z and E were large horses and every time they picked it up he had to back off and start over because he didn't like what he saw. When you have a good reputation and get the job done, you don't have to tell the owners anything but the truth. TJ


There is another component to this and that is the track. California is an island racing wise suffering from short fields . Part of the deal is that the track gives free board and use of their facilities and you run horses. If a horse isn't going run for 18 months he or she really shouldn't be at a racetrack but at a training facility or at a farm.

Yet another reason this didn't happen in the old days- racing secretaries wouldn't have allowed it.

Hi Sy,
I would imagine the short fields didn't help finding races that would go either? I'm well aware of the stall man and the racing secretary making it tough on many with these rules of allotment....not just in the old days, but currently enforced with the smaller owner's/trainer's. Though I'm sure you've encountered and know rank has its privileges and big name owners and trainers aren't subject to these rules. The major players always had the same allotment of stalls every meet, even if they didn't need that many....and the extra stalls remained empty for most of the meet. You'd have to go to these trainers, hat in hand and ask to borrow an empty stall....then hope the office would approve it. There is something else....Shirreffs very seldom sent a horse off the track when he decided to stop on them. Even after Zenyatta won her first Breeder's Cup Lady's Classic in 2008. Shirreffs gave Zenyatta 7 months off right in his Hollywood barn....unwinding her then walking the shedrow everyday for a long time till he decided to start to send her to the track and play with her a bit. Then cranking her up once again after some 4 months of this. He rarely sent a horse to the farm, unless there was a major problem....it's just his style and luckily he can get away with it because of his success on track. If we tried that, they'd tell us to get the horse off the grounds. Shirreffs has long said how great it was to train at Hollywood Park....that barn of his worked as his turnout farm as well as training center:>) I'm sure he's sad that it is closing and the fact they let Hollywood detriorate may have fueled his decision to bring a string to Belmont. TJ

User avatar
Sysonby
Breeder's Cup Contender
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: California

Postby Sysonby » Wed May 29, 2013 8:24 am

TJ wrote:I would imagine the short fields didn't help finding races that would go either? I'm well aware of the stall man and the racing secretary making it tough on many with these rules of allotment....not just in the old days, but currently enforced with the smaller owner's/trainer's. Though I'm sure you've encountered and know rank has its privileges and big name owners and trainers aren't subject to these rules. The major players always had the same allotment of stalls every meet, even if they didn't need that many....and the extra stalls remained empty for most of the meet. You'd have to go to these trainers, hat in hand and ask to borrow an empty stall....then hope the office would approve it. There is something else....Shirreffs very seldom sent a horse off the track when he decided to stop on them. Even after Zenyatta won her first Breeder's Cup Lady's Classic in 2008. Shirreffs gave Zenyatta 7 months off right in his Hollywood barn....unwinding her then walking the shedrow everyday for a long time till he decided to start to send her to the track and play with her a bit. Then cranking her up once again after some 4 months of this. He rarely sent a horse to the farm, unless there was a major problem....it's just his style and luckily he can get away with it because of his success on track. If we tried that, they'd tell us to get the horse off the grounds. Shirreffs has long said how great it was to train at Hollywood Park....that barn of his worked as his turnout farm as well as training center:>) I'm sure he's sad that it is closing and the fact they let Hollywood detriorate may have fueled his decision to bring a string to Belmont. TJ


Zenyatta was probably unique in a lot of ways.

The really interesting thing will be if Moss follows Shirreffs to NY in any large way. He's a Cali guy who likes to see his horses run in person. But his racing manager is married to Shirreffs,

The other thing to watch for is how successful he is in NY, how many he runs and how many hit. I recall a friend telling me in one of the Zenyatta years he was a 12 % trainer without her but he ran so few overall that she skewed the percentage. I haven't personally looked at those numbers but it is something to keep in mind if you are gambling.

User avatar
TJ
Darley line
Posts: 6236
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:54 am
Location: FL, NY

Postby TJ » Wed May 29, 2013 10:18 am

Sysonby wrote:
TJ wrote:I would imagine the short fields didn't help finding races that would go either? I'm well aware of the stall man and the racing secretary making it tough on many with these rules of allotment....not just in the old days, but currently enforced with the smaller owner's/trainer's. Though I'm sure you've encountered and know rank has its privileges and big name owners and trainers aren't subject to these rules. The major players always had the same allotment of stalls every meet, even if they didn't need that many....and the extra stalls remained empty for most of the meet. You'd have to go to these trainers, hat in hand and ask to borrow an empty stall....then hope the office would approve it. There is something else....Shirreffs very seldom sent a horse off the track when he decided to stop on them. Even after Zenyatta won her first Breeder's Cup Lady's Classic in 2008. Shirreffs gave Zenyatta 7 months off right in his Hollywood barn....unwinding her then walking the shedrow everyday for a long time till he decided to start to send her to the track and play with her a bit. Then cranking her up once again after some 4 months of this. He rarely sent a horse to the farm, unless there was a major problem....it's just his style and luckily he can get away with it because of his success on track. If we tried that, they'd tell us to get the horse off the grounds. Shirreffs has long said how great it was to train at Hollywood Park....that barn of his worked as his turnout farm as well as training center:>) I'm sure he's sad that it is closing and the fact they let Hollywood detriorate may have fueled his decision to bring a string to Belmont. TJ


Zenyatta was probably unique in a lot of ways.

The really interesting thing will be if Moss follows Shirreffs to NY in any large way. He's a Cali guy who likes to see his horses run in person. But his racing manager is married to Shirreffs,

The other thing to watch for is how successful he is in NY, how many he runs and how many hit. I recall a friend telling me in one of the Zenyatta years he was a 12 % trainer without her but he ran so few overall that she skewed the percentage. I haven't personally looked at those numbers but it is something to keep in mind if you are gambling.

Hi Sy,
It does help being married to Dottie Ingordo:>) They run one for Moss at Belmont Friday on the turf....it's a tough field. Odeon seems to be another one he took his time with...beginning his career this year as a 4YO. This is only his 4th lifetime start. He broke his maiden in his 2nd start then ran second in a allowance race almost two months ago. So far he's run one other at Belmont and didn't hit the board....a maiden owned by Will Farish. I would have to think Shirreffs style (of bringing horses around very slowly) is the reason why he hits at a lower percentage than other big name trainers. He's never run more than 182 horses in any given year and many years less then 100 runners. Lifetime (going into his 19th year) he's had nearly 2200 starts with 412 winners. He's not one of those high percentage trainers but he does get the most out of what he does have, with over $18,000 average earnings per starter. TJ

reenci
Grade II Winner
Posts: 1302
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 8:53 pm
Location: ny

Postby reenci » Thu May 30, 2013 6:41 pm

win % of 18.727 that's indicative of an excellent/ clean /hay n oats trainer......these stats of 25 to 30 % are just bogus....cheats ..don't kid yourself...
A great man cannot help himself," "He can see things that other men cannot see themselves, and his greatness lies in doing whatever is necessary to make his vision real

kimberley mine
Breeder's Cup Contender
Posts: 1811
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 8:43 pm

Postby kimberley mine » Thu May 30, 2013 7:12 pm

reenci wrote:win % of 18.727 that's indicative of an excellent/ clean /hay n oats trainer......these stats of 25 to 30 % are just bogus....cheats ..don't kid yourself...


NOT SO.

Going by straight-up percentages without context doesn't actually say that. If you have a trainer who has four horses, races them 4 times at a meet (every 2 weeks, not uncommon at bread-and-butter tracks like Parx or Sam Houston), that's 16 races. If the trainer spots them well and each horse wins one race out of the four, there's your 25%. Similarly, if three of the horses are awful and the last one is a hotshot who wins all four of its races, that's still a 25% trainer. If there's one hotshot who wins all four and one of the awful ones manages to eke out a win in a cheap claimer, that's a 30% trainer. Without the context the percentages are meaningless and it's not helpful to anybody to accuse doping in those situations.

User avatar
dublino
Grade I Winner
Posts: 1595
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:54 am

Postby dublino » Fri May 31, 2013 1:51 am

kimberley mine wrote:Without the context the percentages are meaningless


I think I am going to get a T-Shirt made with this on it.

I think everyone should write this down and carry it in their wallet and when someone in whatever walk of life tries to tell them about percentages just reads this and smiles.
Edited by Moderator

User avatar
Sysonby
Breeder's Cup Contender
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: California

Postby Sysonby » Fri May 31, 2013 6:00 am

kimberley mine wrote:
reenci wrote:win % of 18.727 that's indicative of an excellent/ clean /hay n oats trainer......these stats of 25 to 30 % are just bogus....cheats ..don't kid yourself...


NOT SO.

Going by straight-up percentages without context doesn't actually say that. If you have a trainer who has four horses, races them 4 times at a meet (every 2 weeks, not uncommon at bread-and-butter tracks like Parx or Sam Houston), that's 16 races. If the trainer spots them well and each horse wins one race out of the four, there's your 25%. Similarly, if three of the horses are awful and the last one is a hotshot who wins all four of its races, that's still a 25% trainer. If there's one hotshot who wins all four and one of the awful ones manages to eke out a win in a cheap claimer, that's a 30% trainer. Without the context the percentages are meaningless and it's not helpful to anybody to accuse doping in those situations.


Owners should look not only at percentages but also how many horses trainers have and how often they run. Not many of us can afford the Shirreffs system. My trainer was an old timer who learned before the Sheets became so prevalent. He sent one of his to a prominent trainer at another track for a win. There was another race in three weeks and he told his colleague to wheel him back and enter. The second trainer objected "He'll bounce!"

"Yeah he'll bounce right into the winners circle!"

He did.

The notion that horses need two months between races, that horses need over a year to get ready for a race - this is new. The breed hasn't changed - we have.

User avatar
TJ
Darley line
Posts: 6236
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:54 am
Location: FL, NY

Postby TJ » Fri May 31, 2013 7:04 am

Sysonby wrote:
kimberley mine wrote:
reenci wrote:win % of 18.727 that's indicative of an excellent/ clean /hay n oats trainer......these stats of 25 to 30 % are just bogus....cheats ..don't kid yourself...


NOT SO.

Going by straight-up percentages without context doesn't actually say that. If you have a trainer who has four horses, races them 4 times at a meet (every 2 weeks, not uncommon at bread-and-butter tracks like Parx or Sam Houston), that's 16 races. If the trainer spots them well and each horse wins one race out of the four, there's your 25%. Similarly, if three of the horses are awful and the last one is a hotshot who wins all four of its races, that's still a 25% trainer. If there's one hotshot who wins all four and one of the awful ones manages to eke out a win in a cheap claimer, that's a 30% trainer. Without the context the percentages are meaningless and it's not helpful to anybody to accuse doping in those situations.


Owners should look not only at percentages but also how many horses trainers have and how often they run. Not many of us can afford the Shirreffs system. My trainer was an old timer who learned before the Sheets became so prevalent. He sent one of his to a prominent trainer at another track for a win. There was another race in three weeks and he told his colleague to wheel him back and enter. The second trainer objected "He'll bounce!"

"Yeah he'll bounce right into the winners circle!"

He did.

The notion that horses need two months between races, that horses need over a year to get ready for a race - this is new. The breed hasn't changed - we have.

Hi Sy,
I do agree with you and how training methods have changed over the decades. Much has to do with the "sheet numbers" which track every move a horse and trainer make. The "bounce" theory is directly related to this system of quantifying any given horse. When a horse doesn't perform as expected off a good "number"....they are said to "bounce". The gist of the sheets bounce theory are said to be avoided with 5-6 weeks between races and two weeks without a breeze after a race. Personally I don't believe in the theory and I think it is an indication of one size fits all training. Many horses want to run back on short notice and others need more time. Knowing your horse...as the trainer you mentioned did, is key in knowing how much time each individual horse in your care needs to run back and perform consistently. Shirreffs style of training is seldom seen and the reason is as advertised...the expense. Yet there are owners who agree with him and use him for his individual monitoring of every horse in his care. He doesn't always take a year to get a horse ready to run as he does get 2YO's to the races. Keeping them under his wing on track, rather then turning them over to a farm and let others handle them for many months accounts for much of the time consumed. I may be mistaken, but I don't think Zenyatta left his barn for the 4 years he had her and she had at least 14 months of breaks along the way. It will be interesting to see how Shirreffs does at Belmont, between the time he takes with horses and the full fields in Stakes races, it will be interesting to see how he adapts. TJ